Penn State Fallout

There are some things that are black and white. Nobody is on the fence about whether Sandusky’s actions were sick, degrading and reprehensible. Most people admit that Paterno was at best negligent and at worst criminal. The question of the fairness of Penn State’s NCAA penalties is that gray area where reasonable people can disagree.

The important question that needs to be asked isn’t whether the NCAA overstepped its legal bounds. The question is about whether this punishment fits the crime. The select group of people that are responsible for setting this regrettable sideshow in motion are in no way impacted by the penalties imposed as a result of a stated “lack of institutional control”. Sandusky will get what’s coming to him inside a Pennsylvania jail. Paterno is not around to see the dismantling of his legacy. Curley and Schultz are no longer reaping any benefits of being a privileged member of the Penn State community. Once again, the real victims in this situation are the kids. The kids who have committed to living out their dreams and playing for Penn State as well as the kids who have yet to realize that their destiny will be intertwined with this university. Is that really the right move?

These penalties reek of an organization, namely the NCAA, trying to discreetly wipe the egg off of their face and change the conversation. After years of holding up Penn State as an example of how pure college athletics can be, the NCAA is left holding the dirty bag of laundry without a Plan B.

Why not really use this tragic situation to turn a corner and make the right decision for once? The NCAA doesn’t need to give the university a black eye ... Sandusky has already permanently achieved that task. The NCAA shouldn’t take scholarships, the Big 10 shouldn’t ban shares of the conference bowl money. Allow Penn State to thrive. Let the players help facilitate the healing process for the State College community. Let them play in bowls and earn their rightful share of money. The NCAA should then take any of that football related revenue and donate that money to organizations that serve victims of sexual abuse. Hit the university where it will really hurt. Go after the money.

Cautiously optimistic

NBA fans should take one thing from this offseason … the new CBA has hurt everyone and helped no one. Maybe the NBA players were sneaky-smart during the CBA negotiations. Or maybe they were just as clueless as to how things would shake out. In all honesty, it doesn’t seem to matter. The owners secured a deal that they intimated would help achieve competitive balance. Now that we’ve taken the CBA out for a test drive in the beginning of this free agency period, we see that it was a lot of smoke and mirrors. The new CBA simply disguised the same old handcuffs for the usual NBA dogs.

Dwight Howard is still spurning his small-market team for the bright lights of Broadway (or Brooklyn to be exact). Steve Nash has ditched Phoenix for a chance at a championship in Los Angeles. Deron Williams left Dallas holding a boatload of cash at the altar even though Dallas followed all the rules. At the end of the day, the players still have the power. And that’s a big blow to Stern’s idea of competitive balance.

                

           Competitive Balance is defined as “a market situation where no business is too big or has an unfair advantage.” Is the idea of competitive balance ever a realistic aspiration for a sports league like the NBA? As long as players are the recognizable stars and free agency exists, it seems virtually impossible to legislate competitive balance.

And the usual 27 owners are sitting there with egg on their faces. The problem with the cap that the owners pushed through in the new CBA is that it isn’t a hard cap. A hard cap would ensure competitive balance if for no other reason than teams would be forced to regress to the mean.  Without a hard cap, a crafty executive will figure out loopholes. Teams can still manufacture a situation that will work for them.

                 

           The bottom line is this … the players are winning because they’re still getting paid. The players are still going where they want to go. Players have the option to take less money … which means they can leave. Owners honor players’ wishes out of loyalty … which means they can leave. Miami remains a more desirable location than Cleveland … which means players leave.